Jindal vs. Obama: Who's playing whom?

Maybe Gov. Bobby Jindal is playing right into the Democrats' hands. In seeming to back away from his high-profile rejection of $98.4 million from the federal economic stimulus package for expanded unemployment benefits in Louisiana, the theory goes, Jindal comes off as a hypocrite.

Jindal's initial announcement, just as he was gearing up for what was meant to be a star-making response to President Barack Obama's first congressional address, helped galvanize GOP opposition to the spending package and establish Jindal as a national party leader. By slinking back a month later with his hand outstretched, according to this argument, the governor is actually offering Obama a public relations victory.

Or maybe the Democrats are playing into Jindal's hands.

In this interpretation of events, Jindal's not a publicity-seeking climber but a tough negotiator who parlayed the administration's eagerness to see him take the money to win a key concession. At Jindal's behest, the federal labor department has now clarified that states do not have to keep the expanded benefits on the books once the stimulus money runs dry in two years.

The upshot? By forcing the Obama administration to agree to his terms, Jindal has exonerated his initial stance, this theory goes, and shown himself to be motivated more by principle than politics.

Jindal hasn't focused his criticism on the specific increased benefits. Under one provision the state might be required to pass, jobless people enrolled in qualified training programs would be eligible for unemployment benefits. That's an idea that would fit nicely with Jindal's workforce development agenda.

His complaint, rather, is with the total cost of covering more laid-off workers.

In fact, buried under the partisan posturing is a real policy debate.

The argument for taking the money is that it would help more low-wage workers and recent entrants into the market make ends meet. That's in line with Democratic principles.

The argument against it is that businesses that pay unemployment insurance based on prior claims would likely see their assessments go up once the stimulus money is gone. That aligns with Republican ideology.

Jindal originally raised concerns that the state would not be able to return to the more limited rules after the stimulus. State workforce commission director Tim Barfield said Jindal might relent after the feds clarified that the prohibition on writing a sunset date directly into the law does not preclude states from reversing course down the road without fear of penalty.

Now Barfield is waiting to hear back on a request for a waiver to allow Louisiana to accept the money without having to raise business assessments. Early indications are that the feds are reluctant to agree, he told a legislative committee last week, which may make the whole drama moot.

Or not. Jindal's issue isn't just with the Obama administration. Democratic lawmakers here in Louisiana are pushing legislation to force Jindal to accept the money. Even if they don't have the votes to pass the measure or override a veto, they'll try to tag the governor as insensitive to struggling workers, obsessed with raising his national GOP profile at his constituents' expense, or both. You'd think that's a fight he doesn't want to have.

Still, if the two sides can work their issues out, this could turn out to be one of those rare instances when everyone wins -- or feels like they did -- both on politics and policy.

That's not something you hear every day.

CORRECTION: Thursday's column identified Assessor Tom Arnold's publicly funded SUV as a Chevy Yukon. The Yukon is made by GMC.

. . . . . . .

Stephanie Grace is a staff writer. She may be reached at 504.826.3383 or at sgrace@timespicayune.com.